They're using rat fur now?
June 29th 2010 07:22
There's no denying that fashion can be weird. At times, it even borders on disturbing, but like any kind of art, its interpretation will almost always be subjective. And so is the case for what some are calling winter's hottest fashion accessory: rat fur! Designers as diverse as New Orleans local Cree McCree and celebrity favourite Oscar de la Renta have been using rat fur in their recent collections, and as would be expected, it has environmentalists and fashion critics divided. So is this trend grossly unethical, or just plain gross? The answer is not as simple as you'd think.
The rat fur, which has been given the more accurate (and considerably less confronting!) name of "nutria", is sourced from the nutria species of water rat that is native to Argentina. The fur has a significant colour variation - from yellow-toned to rich mahogany - and feels rougher than the more classic furs of rabbit, fox and mink.
Using it in fashion is also nothing new; silent film star Greta Garbo was said to be very fond of her nutria fur coat, and French designer Yves St Laurent was creating nutria fur hats as far back as the 1960s. Rather, it is part of what outspoken anti-fur activist Stella McCartney calls a "sick, twisted fashion moment" - the increase in popularity of real animal fur in clothing. Models who once claimed that they'd rather go naked than wear fur have been flaunting their fur coats for all the world to see, and the new breed of stars like Mary-Kate Olsen, Eva Longoria Parker, Lindsay Lohan and many more seem to be oblivious to the fact that once upon a time, being a fur-wearing celebrity was likely to have you running from animal rights protestors bearing buckets of red paint.
And while most of us would agree that wearing animal fur is highly unethical, there is a point of difference when it comes to rat fur: the fact that the nutria water rat is an environmental menace. They were introduced to Louisiana in the 1930s and, according to nola.com, have been responsible for the destruction of more than 100,000 acres of coastal wetlands, due to their feeding habits of tearing marsh grasses up from the roots. While nutria fur was once considered "a staple fur", the drop in demand for nutria pelts from the 1970s to the end of the 20th Century caused a ballooning in their population, making the condition of the wetlands go from bad to worse.
Louisiana's State Department of Wildlife and Fisheries introduced a bounty to hunters, paid per tail, to keep the nutria population down, but most of the pelts were being incinerated or thrown into landfill - and this is where fashion designer Cree McCree stepped in.
"It's just such a waste," said McCree, whose first collection featuring nutria was called Righteous Fur. "They're cute little creatures, but they are a destructive species. We need all the help we can on the wetlands. Yet, it just seemed like a gigantic waste to me, all this wonderful fur being thrown away. I know fur isn't seen as an eco-friendly thing these days, but the way I see it, this is practically guilt-free fur."
But is there such a thing as guilt-free fur, or is the very idea an oxymoron? While McCree does make a good point in regard to waste, the question of ethics still remains when it comes to the use of nutria fur in fashion. Is the fact that the animals are causing damage to their habitat enough to justify the use of their fur in fashion? If this were so, could the same not be said of using fox fur, or rabbit fur?
On the other hand, by minimising the destruction of the wetlands caused by the overabundance of nutria, it is probable that humans would be saving any number of other animal species who would be suffering as a result of the environmental degradation. The use of nutria fur is ultimately a very complex issue that cannot be addressed in a vacuum.
As for the inherently transient world of fashion, it will be interesting to see if more designers take on the idea of using rat fur in their collections, or if the nutria pelt becomes just another flash-in-the-pan pop cultural moment. I personally have my doubts that nutria fur will ever make it to the mainstream, but hey, I have been wrong before.
The rat fur, which has been given the more accurate (and considerably less confronting!) name of "nutria", is sourced from the nutria species of water rat that is native to Argentina. The fur has a significant colour variation - from yellow-toned to rich mahogany - and feels rougher than the more classic furs of rabbit, fox and mink.
Using it in fashion is also nothing new; silent film star Greta Garbo was said to be very fond of her nutria fur coat, and French designer Yves St Laurent was creating nutria fur hats as far back as the 1960s. Rather, it is part of what outspoken anti-fur activist Stella McCartney calls a "sick, twisted fashion moment" - the increase in popularity of real animal fur in clothing. Models who once claimed that they'd rather go naked than wear fur have been flaunting their fur coats for all the world to see, and the new breed of stars like Mary-Kate Olsen, Eva Longoria Parker, Lindsay Lohan and many more seem to be oblivious to the fact that once upon a time, being a fur-wearing celebrity was likely to have you running from animal rights protestors bearing buckets of red paint.
Sharon Stone, Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen, and Mary J. Blige are among the celebrities who see no problem with wearing real fur.
And while most of us would agree that wearing animal fur is highly unethical, there is a point of difference when it comes to rat fur: the fact that the nutria water rat is an environmental menace. They were introduced to Louisiana in the 1930s and, according to nola.com, have been responsible for the destruction of more than 100,000 acres of coastal wetlands, due to their feeding habits of tearing marsh grasses up from the roots. While nutria fur was once considered "a staple fur", the drop in demand for nutria pelts from the 1970s to the end of the 20th Century caused a ballooning in their population, making the condition of the wetlands go from bad to worse.
Louisiana's State Department of Wildlife and Fisheries introduced a bounty to hunters, paid per tail, to keep the nutria population down, but most of the pelts were being incinerated or thrown into landfill - and this is where fashion designer Cree McCree stepped in.
"It's just such a waste," said McCree, whose first collection featuring nutria was called Righteous Fur. "They're cute little creatures, but they are a destructive species. We need all the help we can on the wetlands. Yet, it just seemed like a gigantic waste to me, all this wonderful fur being thrown away. I know fur isn't seen as an eco-friendly thing these days, but the way I see it, this is practically guilt-free fur."
Two of Cree McCree's Righteous Fur designs: a purse from the nutria pelt, and jewellery made from nutria teeth
But is there such a thing as guilt-free fur, or is the very idea an oxymoron? While McCree does make a good point in regard to waste, the question of ethics still remains when it comes to the use of nutria fur in fashion. Is the fact that the animals are causing damage to their habitat enough to justify the use of their fur in fashion? If this were so, could the same not be said of using fox fur, or rabbit fur?
On the other hand, by minimising the destruction of the wetlands caused by the overabundance of nutria, it is probable that humans would be saving any number of other animal species who would be suffering as a result of the environmental degradation. The use of nutria fur is ultimately a very complex issue that cannot be addressed in a vacuum.
As for the inherently transient world of fashion, it will be interesting to see if more designers take on the idea of using rat fur in their collections, or if the nutria pelt becomes just another flash-in-the-pan pop cultural moment. I personally have my doubts that nutria fur will ever make it to the mainstream, but hey, I have been wrong before.
| 163 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog



























